Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35130937›Full record

ArticleTrials2022

The Best Services Trial (BeST?): a cluster randomised controlled trial comparing the clinical and cost-effectiveness of New Orleans Intervention Model with services as usual (SAU) for infants and young children entering care.

Karen Crawford, Bridie Fitzpatick, Lynn McMahon, Matt Forde, Susanne Miller, Alex McConnachie, Martina Messow, Marion Henderson, Emma McIntosh, Kathleen Boyd and 4 more

Abstract readClinical Trial Protocol
In one paragraph

Article in Trials, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

14 authors.

Karen CrawfordMental Health and Wellbeing, Institute of Health and Wellbeing, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, UK. karen.crawford@glasgow.ac.uk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1615-0575
Bridie FitzpatickCentre for General Practice and Primary Care, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, UK.
Lynn McMahonStratified Medicine Scotland Innovation Centre, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, UK.
Matt FordeNSPCC, London, UK.
Susanne MillerGlasgow Health and Social Care Partnership, Glasgow, UK.
Alex McConnachieRobertson Centre for Biostatistics, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, UK.
Martina MessowRobertson Centre for Biostatistics, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, UK.
Marion HendersonSchool of Social Work and Social Policy, University of Strathclyde, Glasgow, UK.
Emma McIntoshHealth Economics and Health Technology Assessment, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, UK.
Kathleen BoydHealth Economics and Health Technology Assessment, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, UK.
Dennis OugrinInstitute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neurodevelopment, King's College London, London, UK.
Phil WilsonCentre for Rural Health, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, UK.
Nicholas WatsonCentre for Disability Research, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, UK.
Helen MinnisMental Health and Wellbeing, Institute of Health and Wellbeing, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, UK.

Funding

national institute for health research 12/211/54
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAbused and neglected children are at increased risk of health problems throughout life, but negative effects may be ameliorated by nurturing family care. It is not known whether it is better to place these children permanently with substitute (foster or adoptive) families or to attempt to reform their birth families. Previously, we conducted a feasibility randomised controlled trial (RCT) of the New Orleans Intervention Model (NIM) for children aged 0-60 months coming into foster care in Glasgow. NIM is delivered by a multidisciplinary health and social care team and offers families, whose child has been taken into foster care, a structured assessment of family relationships followed by a trial of treatment aiming to improve family functioning. A recommendation is then made for the child to return home or for adoption. In the feasibility RCT, families were willing to be randomised to NIM or optimised social work services as usual and equipoise was maintained. Here we present the protocol of a substantive RCT of NIM including a new London site.

methodsThe study is a multi-site, pragmatic, single-blind, parallel group, cluster randomised controlled superiority trial with an allocation ratio of 1:1. We plan to recruit approximately 390 families across the sites, including those recruited in our feasibility RCT. They will be randomly allocated to NIM or optimised services as usual and followed up to 2.5 years post-randomisation. The principal outcome measure will be child mental health, and secondary outcomes will be child quality of life, the time taken for the child to be placed in permanent care (rehabilitation home or adoption) and the quality of the relationship with the primary caregiver. DISCUSSION: The study is novel in that infant mental health professionals rarely have a role in judicial decisions about children's care placements, and RCTs are rare in the judicial context. The trial will allow us to determine whether NIM is clinically and cost-effective in the UK and findings may have important implications for the use of mental health assessment and treatment as part of the decision-making about children in the care system.

Indexed as

Child AbuseFoster Home CareChildChild, PreschoolCost-Benefit AnalysisEquivalence Trials as TopicHumansInfantInfant, NewbornMulticenter Studies as TopicNew OrleansPragmatic Clinical Trials as TopicQuality of LifeRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicAdoptionCluster randomised controlled trial (RCT)Foster careHealth economicsInfant mental healthJudiciaryParenting capacitySocial careVulnerable families

Identifiers

PMID35130937
PMCPMC8819875

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.